example of research highlights

• Journal Article Publishing Support Center

To post social content, you must have a display name. The page will refresh upon submission. Any pending input will be lost.

How do I include Highlights with my manuscript?

Highlights are a short collection of three to five bullet points that:

• Provide readers with a quick textual overview of the article.
• Convey the core findings.
• Describe the essence of the research (i.e. results or conclusion).
• Highlight what's distinctive about it.

Highlights will be displayed in online search result lists, the contents list and in the online article, but won't (yet) appear in the article PDF file or print.

Answer Highlights are mandatory for some journals and optional for others. You can check the requirements for the journal you're submitting to by reading the Guide for Authors. To find the Guide for Authors:

• Navigate to the journal's Homepage. To find the journal's Homepage search for the journal using the search box under 'Find by journal title' on the journal author's page .
• Click on 'Guide for Authors' in the left-hand menu.

Highlights should be submitted in the following way:

Unless otherwise instructed in the Guide for Authors, Highlights should be included as a separate source file (i.e. Microsoft Word not PDF).

• Select 'Highlights' from the drop-down file list when uploading files.
• Use 'Highlights' as the file name.

With these specifications:

• Include 3 to 5 highlights.
• Each individual Highlight should be a maximum of 85 characters long, including spaces.
• Only the core results of the paper should be covered.

Biochimica et Biophysica Acta (BBA), Bioenergetics, Volume 1807, Issue 10, October 2011, 1364-1369  

• A conformational two-state mechanism for proton pumping complex I is proposed.
• The mechanism relies on stabilization changes of anionic ubiquinone intermediates.
• Electron-transfer and protonation should be strictly controlled during turnover.

Learning and Instruction, Volume 21, Issue 6, December 2011, 746-756  

• Fading of a script alone does not foster domain-general strategy knowledge.
• Performance of the strategy declines during the fading of a script.
• Monitoring by a peer keeps performance of the strategy up during script fading.
• Performance of a strategy after fading fosters domain-general strategy knowledge.
• Fading and monitoring by a peer combined foster domain-general strategy knowledge.  

Was this answer helpful?

Thank you for your feedback, it will help us serve you better. If you require assistance, please scroll down and use one of the contact options to get in touch.

Help us to help you:

Thank you for your feedback!

• Why was this answer not helpful?
• It was hard to understand / follow.
• It did not answer my question.
• The solution did not work.
• There was a mistake in the answer.
• Feel free to leave any comments below: Please enter your feedback to submit this form

Related Articles:

• What are Conflict of Interest Statements, Funding Source Declarations, Author Agreements/Declarations and Permission Notes?
• What should be included in a cover letter?
• How can I approve my submission?
• What does the status of my submission mean in Editorial Manager?
• How do I submit a manuscript in Editorial Manager?

For further assistance:

• PRO Courses Guides New Tech Help Pro Expert Videos About wikiHow Pro Upgrade Sign In
• EDIT Edit this Article
• EXPLORE Tech Help Pro About Us Random Article Quizzes Request a New Article Community Dashboard This Or That Game Popular Categories Arts and Entertainment Artwork Books Movies Computers and Electronics Computers Phone Skills Technology Hacks Health Men's Health Mental Health Women's Health Relationships Dating Love Relationship Issues Hobbies and Crafts Crafts Drawing Games Education & Communication Communication Skills Personal Development Studying Personal Care and Style Fashion Hair Care Personal Hygiene Youth Personal Care School Stuff Dating All Categories Arts and Entertainment Finance and Business Home and Garden Relationship Quizzes Cars & Other Vehicles Food and Entertaining Personal Care and Style Sports and Fitness Computers and Electronics Health Pets and Animals Travel Education & Communication Hobbies and Crafts Philosophy and Religion Work World Family Life Holidays and Traditions Relationships Youth
• Browse Articles
• Learn Something New
• Quizzes Hot
• This Or That Game
• Train Your Brain
• Explore More
• Support wikiHow
• About wikiHow
• Log in / Sign up
• Education and Communications

How to Write Highlights for a Paper

Last Updated: March 20, 2024 Fact Checked

This article was reviewed by Gerald Posner and by wikiHow staff writer, Jennifer Mueller, JD . Gerald Posner is an Author & Journalist based in Miami, Florida. With over 35 years of experience, he specializes in investigative journalism, nonfiction books, and editorials. He holds a law degree from UC College of the Law, San Francisco, and a BA in Political Science from the University of California-Berkeley. He’s the author of thirteen books, including several New York Times bestsellers, the winner of the Florida Book Award for General Nonfiction, and has been a finalist for the Pulitzer Prize in History. He was also shortlisted for the Best Business Book of 2020 by the Society for Advancing Business Editing and Writing. This article has been fact-checked, ensuring the accuracy of any cited facts and confirming the authority of its sources. This article has been viewed 49,201 times.

The highlights for a scientific paper make it easier for people to find it using a search engine. Ideally, your highlights serve as a sort of "elevator pitch" for your paper, describing the results and any new methods you used. Although it depends on the publisher, the highlights for a paper will usually be no more than 3 or 4 bullet-point phrases. You typically don't need to worry about your highlights until the final editing stages before your paper is published. However, strong highlights can get your paper noticed online more quickly, which can give your research a tremendous advantage. [1] X Research source

Drafting the Highlights for Your Paper

• Conversely, good highlights also keep a potential reader from wasting their time. If your paper doesn't cover information that they need to know or are interested in, highlights let them know immediately so they don't have to read through half your paper before they find that out.

• For example, you would write "UV rays affect skin's overall health" rather than "skin's overall health is affected by sun exposure."
• Research papers often use passive voice, which is more wordy and difficult to understand. Because highlights have a strict length requirement, using active voice allows you to stay within the character limits while including the most important information from your article. For example, you might write: "Prolonged exposure to light damages skin cells."

• Use the simplest words possible, even if they aren't technically accurate. For example, instead of referring to "squamous cells," you could say "skin cells" or simply "skin." Your paper will get into the specific cells studied.

Tip: If you know a child or teenager, read your highlights to them and ask if they can understand what your paper is about. If they don't, ask them what they didn't understand and keep revising.

• One method of proofreading is to read your highlights backward, moving word by word. This encourages you to focus on each individual word rather than the phrase as a whole.
• It's also a good idea to let someone else give your highlights a read-through. Someone completely unfamiliar with your highlights or your paper might notice errors you've repeatedly overlooked because you know what you meant to say.

Using Proper Formatting for Your Highlights

• For example, the National Science Foundation wants each highlight on an individual Microsoft PowerPoint slide.
• Highlights were introduced by the publisher Elsevier and many journals and publishers use similar procedures. If the journal or publisher tells you to use Elsevier's requirements, you can get those at https://www.elsevier.com/authors/journal-authors/highlights .

• If you're providing your highlights in bullet points, the bullet point itself typically isn't considered a character. However, all other spaces and punctuation are.
• Some journals or publishers may also have a minimum length. Even if a specific minimum length isn't given, having a highlight that's only 2 or 3 words typically doesn't provide enough information to a potential reader to be helpful.

Tip: You can typically adjust the settings of your word processing program to count characters rather than words. This will make it easier, as you're revising, to ensure your highlights stay within the length requirements.

• Double-check to make sure you've met all the publisher's requirements before you submit your highlights. Violations of the publisher's protocol could delay the publication of your paper.

Expert Q&A

You might also like.

• ↑ https://www.elsevier.com/authors/journal-authors/highlights
• ↑ https://author.miguelpanao.com/writing-meaningful-highlights-in-scientific-papers/
• ↑ https://www.nsf.gov/mps/che/nuggets/highlight-writing.pdf

About This Article

• Send fan mail to authors

Did this article help you?

Featured Articles

Trending Articles

Watch Articles

• Terms of Use
• Privacy Policy
• Do Not Sell or Share My Info
• Not Selling Info

wikiHow Tech Help Pro:

Level up your tech skills and stay ahead of the curve

Writing meaningful Highlights in scientific papers

One novelty in scientific papers in the last decade was Elsevier’s introduction of highlights. Are authors paying sufficient attention to highlights writing?

Highlights are 3 to 5 short sentences containing core findings of the research described in the paper. Highlights are available only online with the purpose of driving a person’s attention toward reading the paper. Therefore, when we’re invited to review a paper, the core findings are one of the first things we need to review and … what a mess!

Instead of core findings we read a short version of the title, operating conditions, etc. It’s like we’re reading an abstract divided into short sentences. So I wondered, is it possible to find guidelines to write more meaningful highlights by ourselves, instead of paying someone else to do it for us?

I find highlights a very important step in scientific articles. Thus, these are my 6 “Highlights” for writing more meaningful highlights based on experience, Journals’ recommendations and the little advice we can find in the web.

1. Understand Highlights Meaning

When I read the highlights in a paper I review, my first question was –  “do authors understand what highlights mean?”

I think if authors realized how important highlights are, they would pay a lot more attention to them. Besides the title, highlights are the first thing a person reads while searching the web for any publications in a certain field. It’s my opportunity as an author, or co-author, to capture someone attention to read my research.

Things are changing in the scientific articles publishing industry, and there is a movement toward the relevance of having more “reads” of your paper, rather than publishing in high impact factor journals.

If you understand what highlights may represent in leading people to read your paper then you realize how important it is to know their meaning.

According to Elsevier, the publisher which introduced highlights, these convey the core findings and provide readers with a quick textual overview of the article . Highlights describe the essence of the research (e.g. Results, conclusions) and highlight what is distinctive about it.

Core Findings.

Quick overview.

The essence of research. 

These are the keywords to understand highlights meaning. The challenge is how to express them in sentences shorter than a tweet…

2. Clear view of the nature of your research

When details in our research work are challenging, we tend to focus our writing describing them. Details are important, especially if challenging, because someone else might want to reproduce your experience and needs those details. But the details of your thought process, or experiments are not the nature of your research. Therefore, they shouldn’t be highlights.

The nature of your research is your WHY .

What is the ultimate question your research is trying to answer?

Why are you researching on a certain topic in the first place?

What drives your research?

Some topics are easier than others, but having a clear view of the WHY in your research is essential for writing meaningful highlights.

3. Realize people know little about your topic

I remember speaking to a small audience and feel I’m not making myself understood. This is a common flaw. Even if you have one, two or more experts in your field in front of you, when presenting an article at a conference, you should always assume there’s someone in the audience who is not an expert in your field. And when you prepare your presentation, you are speaking to this person, not the experts.

Highlights audience is the world. Therefore, you are 100% sure people which know little about your topic will read your highlights. You must write to them. 

This is a major challenge because, ideally, you should be able to express the complexity of your topic in simple, clear and concise words. A way to test these highlights is asking a friend from another field for an opinion.

4. Evidence your contribution in the field

I struggle when people literally waste their highlights with things that don’t provide the nature of their research or evidence their contribution. Let me give you an example. 

If I write 

“a hollow-cone spray is used in an impinging process occurring on a flat surface”

Why is this a highlight? Actually, this is close to what I read recently in a paper I reviewed. In all research about impinging sprays, isn’t it logical this impingement occurs in a surface? Why is this a highlight? The surface can be flat, curved, dried, wetted, structured or not, but this sentence does not explain the nature of research, nor expresses any contribution in the field. 

If we wanted to change this sentence to something more meaningful, it could be 

“Hollow-cone sprays in cooling processes address heterogeneities in temperature field.” 

The sentence is not perfect, but it has 85 characters (after 2 iterations) and contains the nature of research. It introduces the type of sprays; if they’re used in cooling processes, it means their impact on a surface is logical; and it states the purpose of that impact, which is cooling the surface and addressing heterogeneities in temperature fields, thus pointing to the challenge. Let me repeat, this is not a perfect example, but illustrates what I mean.

Another example where a small change can make a difference, at least from my viewpoint. Again, close to what I’ve read recently.

“The effect of drop dynamics, surface temperature and spray height on the liquid film formed after spray impact.”

First, it’s too long, so it needs to be shorten. But it contains what’s included in the paper’s scope, when the journal requires the core findings. Suppose the authors found these three parameters produced an effect on the outcome, a small change can resolve the issue,

“Drop dynamics, surface temperature and spray height affects liquid film formation.”

While the highlight in the first example contextualised the reader, spray cooling involves the formation of liquid films. And through this highlight, the reader knows which parameters affect the outcome and, if interested, he will read the paper to know how.

5. Be clear, concise, and go straight to the point

A non-negligible number of papers I reviewed doesn’t pay much attention to the 85 characters limitation. It forces us to seek clarity in our statements. Be concise in the words used to convey meaning. And go straight to the point because that’s what highlights are for, right? Lead the potential reader to make a quick assessment whether he should read the paper or not.

A good exercise is to distance yourself from your paper. Put yourself in the reader shoes and be critical. Would you read this paper about a topic in your field with these highlights?

6. Use simple terms

This is probably the greatest challenge. But it is important to understand what we mean by simple terms. Some research topics involve words which are not simple because their part of the lexical used in the field. Simple terms come naturally when we have a mature and clear view of our main breakthroughs.

Highlights help you refine the message in your research, evidencing only what really matters. And when we express what matters in simple terms, a reader should experience clarity and the desire to know more. 

These reflections are not exhaustive and I hope these “guidelines” motivated you to be more careful in writing meaningful highlights.

QUESTION: Are there any other suggestions, based on your experience, that would help authors write more meaningful Highlights?

Trackbacks/Pingbacks

• How will scientific writing evolve in the future? - […] I think that expressing our scientific results and explanations in terms of infographics (example) is an evolutionary step forward…

Submit a Comment Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Notify me of follow-up comments by email.

Notify me of new posts by email.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed .

• Discoveries
• Right Journal
• Journal Metrics
• Journal Fit
• Abbreviation
• In-Text Citations
• Bibliographies
• Writing an Article
• Peer Review Types
• Acknowledgements
• Withdrawing a Paper
• Form Letter
• ISO, ANSI, CFR
• Google Scholar
• Journal Manuscript Editing
• Research Manuscript Editing

Book Editing

• Manuscript Editing Services

Medical Editing

• Bioscience Editing
• Physical Science Editing
• PhD Thesis Editing Services
• PhD Editing
• Master’s Proofreading
• Bachelor’s Editing
• Dissertation Proofreading Services
• Best Dissertation Proofreaders
• Masters Dissertation Proofreading
• PhD Proofreaders
• Proofreading PhD Thesis Price
• Journal Article Editing
• Book Editing Service
• Editing and Proofreading Services
• Research Paper Editing
• Medical Manuscript Editing
• Academic Editing
• Social Sciences Editing
• Academic Proofreading
• PhD Theses Editing
• Dissertation Proofreading
• Proofreading Rates UK
• Medical Proofreading
• PhD Proofreading Services UK
• Academic Proofreading Services UK

Medical Editing Services

• Life Science Editing
• Biomedical Editing
• Environmental Science Editing
• Pharmaceutical Science Editing
• Economics Editing
• Psychology Editing
• Sociology Editing
• Archaeology Editing
• History Paper Editing
• Anthropology Editing
• Law Paper Editing
• Engineering Paper Editing
• Technical Paper Editing
• Philosophy Editing
• PhD Dissertation Proofreading
• Lektorat Englisch
• Akademisches Lektorat
• Lektorat Englisch Preise
• Wissenschaftliches Lektorat
• Lektorat Doktorarbeit

PhD Thesis Editing

• Thesis Proofreading Services
• PhD Thesis Proofreading
• Proofreading Thesis Cost
• Proofreading Thesis
• Thesis Editing Services
• Professional Thesis Editing
• Thesis Editing Cost
• Proofreading Dissertation
• Dissertation Proofreading Cost
• Dissertation Proofreader
• Correção de Artigos Científicos
• Correção de Trabalhos Academicos
• Serviços de Correção de Inglês
• Correção de Dissertação
• Correção de Textos Precos
• 定額 ネイティブチェック
• Copy Editing
• FREE Courses
• Revision en Ingles
• Revision de Textos en Ingles
• Revision de Tesis
• Revision Medica en Ingles
• Revision de Tesis Precio
• Revisão de Artigos Científicos
• Revisão de Trabalhos Academicos
• Serviços de Revisão de Inglês
• Revisão de Dissertação
• Revisão de Textos Precos
• Corrección de Textos en Ingles
• Corrección de Tesis
• Corrección de Tesis Precio
• Corrección Medica en Ingles
• Corrector ingles

Select Page

How To Write Highlights for an Academic or Scientific Paper

Posted by Rene Tetzner | Sep 7, 2021 | Paper Writing Advice | 0 |

How To Write Highlights for an Academic or Scientific Paper Although some academic and scientific journals have a long tradition of requesting summaries of key findings from the authors of articles accepted for publication, highlights are, for the most part, a relatively recent development in scholarly publishing. Elsevier first introduced highlights in some of its scholarly journals less than a decade ago, with its other journals and many produced by other publishers soon picking up this feature as well. The increasing popularity of highlights for research articles can be explained by their usefulness and appeal for both readers and authors in an online publishing environment. Readers are able to find and view in an extremely concise format the results presented in a published manuscript and thus determine very quickly whether they want to read the paper or not. With the Elsevier Research Highlights app, they can easily do this on their smartphones and even have the articles they wish to read sent to their inboxes. Authors benefit because their papers are given the advantage of greater visibility and discoverability, which can lead to more readers and higher citation counts. In addition, condensing the key elements of a research article into a few highlights can help an author focus more effectively on the primary contributions of his or her research.

The content, length and format of highlights for a research paper differ somewhat among academic and scientific journals, so one journal may simply want a bulleted list of keywords or key phrases, whereas another will require a thorough summary of the research results in the form of a brief paragraph. Elsevier journals ask for a list of bullet points that communicate the core findings of an article, conveying the essence of the research as well as its distinctiveness, but eliminating the background, methodology and other information that might appear in an abstract. Between three and five highlights are usually required, with each one not exceeding 85 characters, including spaces. The Elsevier model may be a good one to use if the journal to which you are submitting a paper indicates that highlights are desirable but provides no specific instructions or guidelines. Yet varying preferences mean that it is always wise to take a close look at the highlights in papers the journal has recently published, particularly any papers that are very similar to your own. In some cases, highlights will not be required until a paper is accepted for publication, so be sure to note when highlights should be submitted as well what form they should take.

Regardless of the exact format of the highlights required, they will almost certainly need to be concise in order to condense a great deal of complex information into a very little textual space. Shortening phrases, simplifying vocabulary, eliminating redundant words and using the active voice will help with observing word and character limits, and replacing long words with shorter synonyms will also help with the latter. These are good writing strategies when addressing a wide or general audience in any case, and this tends to be a desirable goal in highlights for a research paper, as does avoiding jargon and highly technical language. Do note, however, that a few journals will want authors to assume an audience of specialist readers for their highlights, in which case the guidelines will probably specify this. Keywords and key phrases are often encouraged in highlights, but nonstandard abbreviations are best avoided and must be spelled out when first used if they prove necessary. Highlights are usually written in full sentences even when they are presented as bullet points, and it is essential to write clearly and correctly if you wish to communicate effectively with potential readers and hold out the prospect of an excellent paper, so errors in spelling, grammar, punctuation and logic must be eliminated. A logical approach to highlights that begins with clarifying the nature of the research, proceeds with clear statements about the most important results and finishes with outlining the paper’s contribution to the field will generally prove successful.

Keeping both your readers and your research firmly in mind as you write your highlights is vital. Simplifying language and tucking everything you need to say into short and engaging highlights can lead to oversimplifying or exaggerating research findings, especially since the highlights must stand alone without any of the explanations, nuances and complications offered in the main paper. It is therefore imperative to give your highlights serious thought, ensuring that they accurately represent for readers the primary or most exciting results presented in your paper, and also that the paper itself lays emphasis on the findings prioritised in your highlights. For this reason, highlights are best drafted after the paper is written, and some authors will even go back after the highlights are written and revise their papers to achieve a clearer focus on the highlighted results. The process of writing appropriate highlights can therefore enable effective editing and help an author produce a better paper. However you choose to work at writing the highlights for your academic or scientific paper, remember that they will probably be the first thing after the title that a prospective reader encounters and they may even appear in the journal’s table of contents, so you want your highlights to make the best possible impression and lead readers to a paper that lives up to their claims.

You might be interested in Services offered by Proof-Reading-Service.com

Journal editing.

Journal article editing services

PhD thesis editing services

Scientific Editing

Manuscript editing.

Manuscript editing services

Expert Editing

Expert editing for all papers

Research Editing

Research paper editing services

Professional book editing services

Related Posts

How To Write a Journal Article

September 6, 2021

How To Write the Findings Section of a Research Paper

September 2, 2021

Tips on How To Write a Journal Article

August 30, 2021

Tips on How To Write an Effective Figure Legend

August 27, 2021

Our Recent Posts

Our review ratings

• Examples of Research Paper Topics in Different Study Areas Score: 98%
• Dealing with Language Problems – Journal Editor’s Feedback Score: 95%
• Making Good Use of a Professional Proofreader Score: 92%
• How To Format Your Journal Paper Using Published Articles Score: 95%
• Journal Rejection as Inspiration for a New Perspective Score: 95%

Explore our Categories

• Abbreviation in Academic Writing (4)
• Career Advice for Academics (5)
• Dealing with Paper Rejection (11)
• Grammar in Academic Writing (5)
• Help with Peer Review (7)
• How To Get Published (146)
• Paper Writing Advice (17)
• Referencing & Bibliographies (16)

Research Highlight

Research highlights are usually commissioned from recognized experts in a particular field. Suggestions and ideas for articles may be submitted by email .

Key aims of Research highlights are to highlight one or more exciting research article or clinical trial, recently published in Genome Medicine or another journal, and to place the new findings into the context of the current literature.

Research highlights should be around 1200 words with up to 10 references. The Abstract should be a maximum of 75 words.

Preparing your manuscript

The information below details the section headings that you should include in your manuscript and what information should be within each section.

Please note that your manuscript must include a 'Declarations' section including all of the subheadings (please see below for more information).

The title page should:

• "A versus B in the treatment of C: a randomized controlled trial", "X is a risk factor for Y: a case control study", "What is the impact of factor X on subject Y: A systematic review"
• or for non-clinical or non-research studies: a description of what the article reports
• if a collaboration group should be listed as an author, please list the group name as an author. If you would like the names of the individual members of the group to be searchable through their individual PubMed records, please include this information in the “Acknowledgements” section in accordance with the instructions below
• Large Language Models (LLMs), such as ChatGPT , do not currently satisfy our authorship criteria . Notably an attribution of authorship carries with it accountability for the work, which cannot be effectively applied to LLMs. Use of an LLM should be properly documented in the Methods section (and if a Methods section is not available, in a suitable alternative part) of the manuscript
• indicate the corresponding author

Please minimize the use of abbreviations and do not cite references in the abstract. The abstract should briefly summarize the aim, findings or purpose of the article. The Abstract should not exceed 250 words.

Three to ten keywords representing the main content of the article.

This should contain the body of the article, and may also be broken into subsections with short, informative headings.

List of abbreviations

If abbreviations are used in the text they should be defined in the text at first use, and a list of abbreviations should be provided.

Declarations

All manuscripts must contain the following sections under the heading 'Declarations':

Ethics approval and consent to participate

Consent for publication, availability of data and materials, competing interests, authors' contributions, acknowledgements.

• Authors' information (optional)

Please see below for details on the information to be included in these sections.

If any of the sections are not relevant to your manuscript, please include the heading and write 'Not applicable' for that section. 

Manuscripts reporting studies involving human participants, human data or human tissue must:

• include a statement on ethics approval and consent (even where the need for approval was waived)
• include the name of the ethics committee that approved the study and the committee’s reference number if appropriate

Studies involving animals must include a statement on ethics approval and for experimental studies involving client-owned animals, authors must also include a statement on informed consent from the client or owner.

See our editorial policies for more information.

If your manuscript does not report on or involve the use of any animal or human data or tissue, please state “Not applicable” in this section.

If your manuscript contains any individual person’s data in any form (including any individual details, images or videos), consent for publication must be obtained from that person, or in the case of children, their parent or legal guardian. All presentations of case reports must have consent for publication.

You can use your institutional consent form or our consent form if you prefer. You should not send the form to us on submission, but we may request to see a copy at any stage (including after publication).

See our editorial policies for more information on consent for publication.

If your manuscript does not contain data from any individual person, please state “Not applicable” in this section.

All manuscripts must include an ‘Availability of data and materials’ statement. Data availability statements should include information on where data supporting the results reported in the article can be found including, where applicable, hyperlinks to publicly archived datasets analysed or generated during the study. By data we mean the minimal dataset that would be necessary to interpret, replicate and build upon the findings reported in the article. We recognise it is not always possible to share research data publicly, for instance when individual privacy could be compromised, and in such instances data availability should still be stated in the manuscript along with any conditions for access.

Authors are also encouraged to preserve search strings on searchRxiv https://searchrxiv.org/ , an archive to support researchers to report, store and share their searches consistently and to enable them to review and re-use existing searches. searchRxiv enables researchers to obtain a digital object identifier (DOI) for their search, allowing it to be cited. 

Data availability statements can take one of the following forms (or a combination of more than one if required for multiple datasets):

• The datasets generated and/or analysed during the current study are available in the [NAME] repository, [PERSISTENT WEB LINK TO DATASETS]
• The datasets used and/or analysed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.
• All data generated or analysed during this study are included in this published article [and its supplementary information files].
• The datasets generated and/or analysed during the current study are not publicly available due [REASON WHY DATA ARE NOT PUBLIC] but are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.
• Data sharing is not applicable to this article as no datasets were generated or analysed during the current study.
• The data that support the findings of this study are available from [third party name] but restrictions apply to the availability of these data, which were used under license for the current study, and so are not publicly available. Data are however available from the authors upon reasonable request and with permission of [third party name].
• Not applicable. If your manuscript does not contain any data, please state 'Not applicable' in this section.

More examples of template data availability statements, which include examples of openly available and restricted access datasets, are available here .

BioMed Central strongly encourages the citation of any publicly available data on which the conclusions of the paper rely in the manuscript. Data citations should include a persistent identifier (such as a DOI) and should ideally be included in the reference list. Citations of datasets, when they appear in the reference list, should include the minimum information recommended by DataCite and follow journal style. Dataset identifiers including DOIs should be expressed as full URLs. For example:

Hao Z, AghaKouchak A, Nakhjiri N, Farahmand A. Global integrated drought monitoring and prediction system (GIDMaPS) data sets. figshare. 2014. http://dx.doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.853801

With the corresponding text in the Availability of data and materials statement:

The datasets generated during and/or analysed during the current study are available in the [NAME] repository, [PERSISTENT WEB LINK TO DATASETS]. [Reference number]  

If you wish to co-submit a data note describing your data to be published in BMC Research Notes , you can do so by visiting our submission portal . Data notes support open data and help authors to comply with funder policies on data sharing. Co-published data notes will be linked to the research article the data support ( example ).

All financial and non-financial competing interests must be declared in this section.

See our editorial policies for a full explanation of competing interests. If you are unsure whether you or any of your co-authors have a competing interest please contact the editorial office.

Please use the authors initials to refer to each authors' competing interests in this section.

If you do not have any competing interests, please state "The authors declare that they have no competing interests" in this section.

All sources of funding for the research reported should be declared. If the funder has a specific role in the conceptualization, design, data collection, analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript, this should be declared.

The individual contributions of authors to the manuscript should be specified in this section. Guidance and criteria for authorship can be found in our editorial policies .

Please use initials to refer to each author's contribution in this section, for example: "FC analyzed and interpreted the patient data regarding the hematological disease and the transplant. RH performed the histological examination of the kidney, and was a major contributor in writing the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript."

Please acknowledge anyone who contributed towards the article who does not meet the criteria for authorship including anyone who provided professional writing services or materials.

Authors should obtain permission to acknowledge from all those mentioned in the Acknowledgements section.

See our editorial policies for a full explanation of acknowledgements and authorship criteria.

If you do not have anyone to acknowledge, please write "Not applicable" in this section.

Group authorship (for manuscripts involving a collaboration group): if you would like the names of the individual members of a collaboration Group to be searchable through their individual PubMed records, please ensure that the title of the collaboration Group is included on the title page and in the submission system and also include collaborating author names as the last paragraph of the “Acknowledgements” section. Please add authors in the format First Name, Middle initial(s) (optional), Last Name. You can add institution or country information for each author if you wish, but this should be consistent across all authors.

Please note that individual names may not be present in the PubMed record at the time a published article is initially included in PubMed as it takes PubMed additional time to code this information.

Authors' information

This section is optional.

You may choose to use this section to include any relevant information about the author(s) that may aid the reader's interpretation of the article, and understand the standpoint of the author(s). This may include details about the authors' qualifications, current positions they hold at institutions or societies, or any other relevant background information. Please refer to authors using their initials. Note this section should not be used to describe any competing interests.

Footnotes can be used to give additional information, which may include the citation of a reference included in the reference list. They should not consist solely of a reference citation, and they should never include the bibliographic details of a reference. They should also not contain any figures or tables.

Footnotes to the text are numbered consecutively; those to tables should be indicated by superscript lower-case letters (or asterisks for significance values and other statistical data). Footnotes to the title or the authors of the article are not given reference symbols.

Always use footnotes instead of endnotes.

Examples of the Vancouver reference style are shown below.

See our editorial policies for author guidance on good citation practice

Web links and URLs: All web links and URLs, including links to the authors' own websites, should be given a reference number and included in the reference list rather than within the text of the manuscript. They should be provided in full, including both the title of the site and the URL, as well as the date the site was accessed, in the following format: The Mouse Tumor Biology Database. http://tumor.informatics.jax.org/mtbwi/index.do . Accessed 20 May 2013. If an author or group of authors can clearly be associated with a web link, such as for weblogs, then they should be included in the reference.

Example reference style:

Article within a journal

Smith JJ. The world of science. Am J Sci. 1999;36:234-5.

Article within a journal (no page numbers)

Rohrmann S, Overvad K, Bueno-de-Mesquita HB, Jakobsen MU, Egeberg R, Tjønneland A, et al. Meat consumption and mortality - results from the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition. BMC Medicine. 2013;11:63.

Article within a journal by DOI

Slifka MK, Whitton JL. Clinical implications of dysregulated cytokine production. Dig J Mol Med. 2000; doi:10.1007/s801090000086.

Article within a journal supplement

Frumin AM, Nussbaum J, Esposito M. Functional asplenia: demonstration of splenic activity by bone marrow scan. Blood 1979;59 Suppl 1:26-32.

Book chapter, or an article within a book

Wyllie AH, Kerr JFR, Currie AR. Cell death: the significance of apoptosis. In: Bourne GH, Danielli JF, Jeon KW, editors. International review of cytology. London: Academic; 1980. p. 251-306.

OnlineFirst chapter in a series (without a volume designation but with a DOI)

Saito Y, Hyuga H. Rate equation approaches to amplification of enantiomeric excess and chiral symmetry breaking. Top Curr Chem. 2007. doi:10.1007/128_2006_108.

Complete book, authored

Blenkinsopp A, Paxton P. Symptoms in the pharmacy: a guide to the management of common illness. 3rd ed. Oxford: Blackwell Science; 1998.

Online document

Doe J. Title of subordinate document. In: The dictionary of substances and their effects. Royal Society of Chemistry. 1999. http://www.rsc.org/dose/title of subordinate document. Accessed 15 Jan 1999.

Online database

Healthwise Knowledgebase. US Pharmacopeia, Rockville. 1998. http://www.healthwise.org. Accessed 21 Sept 1998.

Supplementary material/private homepage

Doe J. Title of supplementary material. 2000. http://www.privatehomepage.com. Accessed 22 Feb 2000.

University site

Doe, J: Title of preprint. http://www.uni-heidelberg.de/mydata.html (1999). Accessed 25 Dec 1999.

Doe, J: Trivial HTTP, RFC2169. ftp://ftp.isi.edu/in-notes/rfc2169.txt (1999). Accessed 12 Nov 1999.

Organization site

ISSN International Centre: The ISSN register. http://www.issn.org (2006). Accessed 20 Feb 2007.

Dataset with persistent identifier

Zheng L-Y, Guo X-S, He B, Sun L-J, Peng Y, Dong S-S, et al. Genome data from sweet and grain sorghum (Sorghum bicolor). GigaScience Database. 2011. http://dx.doi.org/10.5524/100012 .

Figures, tables and additional files

See  General formatting guidelines  for information on how to format figures, tables and additional files.

Submit manuscript

• Editorial Board
• Editorial Team
• Call for EBMs
• Call for papers
• Sign up for article alerts and news from this journal
• Manuscript editing services

Announcements

Submissions from medRxiv 

Authors are now able to submit manuscripts to Genome Medicine  directly from medRxiv without having to re-upload files.

Portable peer review

To reduce time spent on serial submissions and iterative reviewing, Genome Medicine offers to consider manuscripts on the basis of reviews received at other journals. We also support transfers of reviews obtained at Genome Medicine to other journals, including those outside of BMC and Springer Nature. Learn more from our peer review policy page .

• Follow us on Twitter

Annual Journal Metrics

2022 Citation Impact 12.3 - 2-year Impact Factor 13.8 - 5-year Impact Factor 2.422 - SNIP (Source Normalized Impact per Paper) 4.851 - SJR (SCImago Journal Rank)

2023 Speed 9 days submission to first editorial decision for all manuscripts (Median) 185 days submission to accept (Median)

2023 Usage  2,331,772 downloads 4,916 Altmetric mentions

• More about our metrics

Peer Review Taxonomy

This journal is participating in a pilot of NISO/STM's Working Group on Peer Review Taxonomy, to identify and standardize definitions and terminology in peer review practices in order to make the peer review process for articles and journals more transparent. Further information on the pilot is available here . 

The following summary describes the peer review process for this journal:

• Identity transparency: Single anonymized
• Reviewer interacts with: Editor
• Review information published:  None

We welcome your feedback on this Peer Review Taxonomy Pilot. Please can you take the time to complete this short survey.

Genome Medicine

ISSN: 1756-994X

• Submission enquiries: [email protected]
• General enquiries: [email protected]

•      Language Editing     For Manuscripts    For Response Letter new    For LaTeX    For Annual Review and Tenure    For Books new
•      Scientific Editing     For Manuscripts    For Response Letter new
•      Grant Editing 
•      Translation 
• Publication Support  Journal Recommendation  Manuscript Formatting  Figure Formatting  Data Analysis new  Plagiarism Check  Conference Poster  Plain Language Summary
• Scientific Illustration  Journal Cover Design  Graphical Abstract  Infographic  Custom Illustration
• Scientific Videos  Video Abstract  Explainer Video  Scientific Animation
• Ethics and Confidentiality
• Editorial Certificate
• Testimonials
• Design Gallery
• Institutional Provider
• Publisher Portal
• Brand Localization
• Journal Selector Tool
• Learning Nexus

What are Manuscript Highlights?

Intentional Space Tag

Contact us  

Your name *

Your email *

Your message *

Please fill in all fields and provide a valid email.

© 2010-2024  ACCDON LLC 400 5 th Ave, Suite 530, Waltham, MA 02451, USA Privacy • Terms of Service

© 2010-2024 United States: ACCDON LLC Tel: 1-781-202-9968 Email: [email protected]

Address: 400 5 th Ave, Suite 530, Waltham, Massachusetts 02451, United States

UW W Logo Program on Climate Change

• College of the Environment Logo Text
• University of Washington Logo Text

Write a Research Highlight

Research highlights are short layman-style summaries of peer-reviewed research papers surrounding climate and climate change.

If you are associated with the UW, and have a recent paper that informs climate, we will work with you to create a research highlight. Contact Miriam Bertram ( uwpcc@uw.edu ).

Research Highlight Format:

See a great example here.

Subtitle: one line clarification statement

Contributor of Research Highlight: you (remember to send us a picture of yourself too!)

Key Points: two or three bullet points that summarize work

Overview: two or three paragraphs that describe the significance of the work in the broad context of understanding climate change, climate impacts.  

Feel free to add a personal touch about what this research means to you, how long it took, etc.

Relevant images: these could be pictures of you/your team doing fieldwork, working on the project, etc. Include caption and credit. 

Authors & Affiliations:

Publication Date:

Publication Journal:

• Privacy Policy

Home » Research Summary – Structure, Examples and Writing Guide

Research Summary – Structure, Examples and Writing Guide

Table of Contents

Research Summary

Definition:

A research summary is a brief and concise overview of a research project or study that highlights its key findings, main points, and conclusions. It typically includes a description of the research problem, the research methods used, the results obtained, and the implications or significance of the findings. It is often used as a tool to quickly communicate the main findings of a study to other researchers, stakeholders, or decision-makers.

Structure of Research Summary

The Structure of a Research Summary typically include:

• Introduction : This section provides a brief background of the research problem or question, explains the purpose of the study, and outlines the research objectives.
• Methodology : This section explains the research design, methods, and procedures used to conduct the study. It describes the sample size, data collection methods, and data analysis techniques.
• Results : This section presents the main findings of the study, including statistical analysis if applicable. It may include tables, charts, or graphs to visually represent the data.
• Discussion : This section interprets the results and explains their implications. It discusses the significance of the findings, compares them to previous research, and identifies any limitations or future directions for research.
• Conclusion : This section summarizes the main points of the research and provides a conclusion based on the findings. It may also suggest implications for future research or practical applications of the results.
• References : This section lists the sources cited in the research summary, following the appropriate citation style.

How to Write Research Summary

Here are the steps you can follow to write a research summary:

• Read the research article or study thoroughly: To write a summary, you must understand the research article or study you are summarizing. Therefore, read the article or study carefully to understand its purpose, research design, methodology, results, and conclusions.
• Identify the main points : Once you have read the research article or study, identify the main points, key findings, and research question. You can highlight or take notes of the essential points and findings to use as a reference when writing your summary.
• Write the introduction: Start your summary by introducing the research problem, research question, and purpose of the study. Briefly explain why the research is important and its significance.
• Summarize the methodology : In this section, summarize the research design, methods, and procedures used to conduct the study. Explain the sample size, data collection methods, and data analysis techniques.
• Present the results: Summarize the main findings of the study. Use tables, charts, or graphs to visually represent the data if necessary.
• Interpret the results: In this section, interpret the results and explain their implications. Discuss the significance of the findings, compare them to previous research, and identify any limitations or future directions for research.
• Conclude the summary : Summarize the main points of the research and provide a conclusion based on the findings. Suggest implications for future research or practical applications of the results.
• Revise and edit : Once you have written the summary, revise and edit it to ensure that it is clear, concise, and free of errors. Make sure that your summary accurately represents the research article or study.
• Add references: Include a list of references cited in the research summary, following the appropriate citation style.

Example of Research Summary

Here is an example of a research summary:

Title: The Effects of Yoga on Mental Health: A Meta-Analysis

Introduction: This meta-analysis examines the effects of yoga on mental health. The study aimed to investigate whether yoga practice can improve mental health outcomes such as anxiety, depression, stress, and quality of life.

Methodology : The study analyzed data from 14 randomized controlled trials that investigated the effects of yoga on mental health outcomes. The sample included a total of 862 participants. The yoga interventions varied in length and frequency, ranging from four to twelve weeks, with sessions lasting from 45 to 90 minutes.

Results : The meta-analysis found that yoga practice significantly improved mental health outcomes. Participants who practiced yoga showed a significant reduction in anxiety and depression symptoms, as well as stress levels. Quality of life also improved in those who practiced yoga.

Discussion : The findings of this study suggest that yoga can be an effective intervention for improving mental health outcomes. The study supports the growing body of evidence that suggests that yoga can have a positive impact on mental health. Limitations of the study include the variability of the yoga interventions, which may affect the generalizability of the findings.

Conclusion : Overall, the findings of this meta-analysis support the use of yoga as an effective intervention for improving mental health outcomes. Further research is needed to determine the optimal length and frequency of yoga interventions for different populations.

References :

• Cramer, H., Lauche, R., Langhorst, J., Dobos, G., & Berger, B. (2013). Yoga for depression: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Depression and anxiety, 30(11), 1068-1083.
• Khalsa, S. B. (2004). Yoga as a therapeutic intervention: a bibliometric analysis of published research studies. Indian journal of physiology and pharmacology, 48(3), 269-285.
• Ross, A., & Thomas, S. (2010). The health benefits of yoga and exercise: a review of comparison studies. The Journal of Alternative and Complementary Medicine, 16(1), 3-12.

Purpose of Research Summary

The purpose of a research summary is to provide a brief overview of a research project or study, including its main points, findings, and conclusions. The summary allows readers to quickly understand the essential aspects of the research without having to read the entire article or study.

Research summaries serve several purposes, including:

• Facilitating comprehension: A research summary allows readers to quickly understand the main points and findings of a research project or study without having to read the entire article or study. This makes it easier for readers to comprehend the research and its significance.
• Communicating research findings: Research summaries are often used to communicate research findings to a wider audience, such as policymakers, practitioners, or the general public. The summary presents the essential aspects of the research in a clear and concise manner, making it easier for non-experts to understand.
• Supporting decision-making: Research summaries can be used to support decision-making processes by providing a summary of the research evidence on a particular topic. This information can be used by policymakers or practitioners to make informed decisions about interventions, programs, or policies.
• Saving time: Research summaries save time for researchers, practitioners, policymakers, and other stakeholders who need to review multiple research studies. Rather than having to read the entire article or study, they can quickly review the summary to determine whether the research is relevant to their needs.

Characteristics of Research Summary

The following are some of the key characteristics of a research summary:

• Concise : A research summary should be brief and to the point, providing a clear and concise overview of the main points of the research.
• Objective : A research summary should be written in an objective tone, presenting the research findings without bias or personal opinion.
• Comprehensive : A research summary should cover all the essential aspects of the research, including the research question, methodology, results, and conclusions.
• Accurate : A research summary should accurately reflect the key findings and conclusions of the research.
• Clear and well-organized: A research summary should be easy to read and understand, with a clear structure and logical flow.
• Relevant : A research summary should focus on the most important and relevant aspects of the research, highlighting the key findings and their implications.
• Audience-specific: A research summary should be tailored to the intended audience, using language and terminology that is appropriate and accessible to the reader.
• Citations : A research summary should include citations to the original research articles or studies, allowing readers to access the full text of the research if desired.

When to write Research Summary

Here are some situations when it may be appropriate to write a research summary:

• Proposal stage: A research summary can be included in a research proposal to provide a brief overview of the research aims, objectives, methodology, and expected outcomes.
• Conference presentation: A research summary can be prepared for a conference presentation to summarize the main findings of a study or research project.
• Journal submission: Many academic journals require authors to submit a research summary along with their research article or study. The summary provides a brief overview of the study’s main points, findings, and conclusions and helps readers quickly understand the research.
• Funding application: A research summary can be included in a funding application to provide a brief summary of the research aims, objectives, and expected outcomes.
• Policy brief: A research summary can be prepared as a policy brief to communicate research findings to policymakers or stakeholders in a concise and accessible manner.

Advantages of Research Summary

Research summaries offer several advantages, including:

• Time-saving: A research summary saves time for readers who need to understand the key findings and conclusions of a research project quickly. Rather than reading the entire research article or study, readers can quickly review the summary to determine whether the research is relevant to their needs.
• Clarity and accessibility: A research summary provides a clear and accessible overview of the research project’s main points, making it easier for readers to understand the research without having to be experts in the field.
• Improved comprehension: A research summary helps readers comprehend the research by providing a brief and focused overview of the key findings and conclusions, making it easier to understand the research and its significance.
• Enhanced communication: Research summaries can be used to communicate research findings to a wider audience, such as policymakers, practitioners, or the general public, in a concise and accessible manner.
• Facilitated decision-making: Research summaries can support decision-making processes by providing a summary of the research evidence on a particular topic. Policymakers or practitioners can use this information to make informed decisions about interventions, programs, or policies.
• Increased dissemination: Research summaries can be easily shared and disseminated, allowing research findings to reach a wider audience.

Limitations of Research Summary

Limitations of the Research Summary are as follows:

• Limited scope: Research summaries provide a brief overview of the research project’s main points, findings, and conclusions, which can be limiting. They may not include all the details, nuances, and complexities of the research that readers may need to fully understand the study’s implications.
• Risk of oversimplification: Research summaries can be oversimplified, reducing the complexity of the research and potentially distorting the findings or conclusions.
• Lack of context: Research summaries may not provide sufficient context to fully understand the research findings, such as the research background, methodology, or limitations. This may lead to misunderstandings or misinterpretations of the research.
• Possible bias: Research summaries may be biased if they selectively emphasize certain findings or conclusions over others, potentially distorting the overall picture of the research.
• Format limitations: Research summaries may be constrained by the format or length requirements, making it challenging to fully convey the research’s main points, findings, and conclusions.
• Accessibility: Research summaries may not be accessible to all readers, particularly those with limited literacy skills, visual impairments, or language barriers.

About the author

Muhammad Hassan

Researcher, Academic Writer, Web developer

You may also like

Data Collection – Methods Types and Examples

Delimitations in Research – Types, Examples and...

Research Process – Steps, Examples and Tips

Research Design – Types, Methods and Examples

Institutional Review Board – Application Sample...

Evaluating Research – Process, Examples and...

Value of the Influence of Research Highlights on Academic Papers

• Conference paper
• First Online: 04 July 2022
• Cite this conference paper

• Yue Liu 8 ,
• Dejun Zheng 8 ,
• Haichen Zhou 9 &
• Shaoxiong Fu 8  

Part of the book series: Communications in Computer and Information Science ((CCIS,volume 1593))

Included in the following conference series:

• International Conference on Knowledge Management in Organizations

563 Accesses

This study explores the differences between highlight papers and non-highlight papers from the perspective of academic influence as a crucial insight for evaluating scientific research. Three dimensions are considered: journals, papers, and research highlights. We selected 8 academic journals in the field of library and information science, which are published by Elsevier and indexed by SSCI, and analyzed 5,020 academic papers published therein from 2011 to 2020. The results of our empirical study demonstrate that all journals acknowledge the existence of research highlights, although not all online academic papers provide them. In recent years, the number of highlight papers has increased annually, and more importantly, the proportion has also grown steadily. The ETA square coefficient of citations is higher for highlight papers compared to non-highlight papers. Furthermore, in the training of the innovation recognition model, the effect of the training model that uses the research highlights of academic papers with high citation frequency is better, although the PRF value has a smaller difference.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

• Available as PDF
• Read on any device
• Instant download
• Own it forever
• Available as EPUB and PDF
• Compact, lightweight edition
• Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
• Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Elsevier Systems. Highlights. https://www.elsevier.com/authors/tools-and-resources/highlights . Accessed 10 Oct 2021

Chuanjun, S., Guoxin, Y.: Exploration of the research “highlights” in academic papers. Libr. Inf. Serv. 64 (9), 104 (2020). https://doi.org/10.13266/j.issn.0252-3116.2020.09.012

Tse, P.: Stance in academic bios. In: Stance and Voice in Written Academic Genres, pp. 69–84. Palgrave Macmillan, London (2012)

Google Scholar  

Yang, W.: Evaluative language and interactive discourse in journal article highlights. Engl. Specif. Purp. 42 , 89–103 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2016.01.001

Article   Google Scholar  

Kong, L., Wang, D.: Comparison of citations and attention of cover and noncover papers. J. Informetrics 14 (4), 101095 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2020.101095

Schubert, A., Schubert, G.: Whatever happened to Garfield’s constant? Scientometrics 114 (2), 659–667 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-017-2527-3

Kaltenborn, K.F., Kuhn, K.: The journal impact factor as a parameter for the evaluation of researchers and research. Rev. Esp. Enferm. Dig. 96 (7), 460–476 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00063-003-1240-6

da Silva, J.A.T., Memon, A.R.: CiteScore: a cite for sore eyes, or a valuable, transparent metric? Scientometrics 111 (1), 553–556 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-017-2250-0

On impact. Nat. Methods 12 , 693 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1038/nmeth.3520

Fernandez-Llimos, F.: Differences and similarities between journal impact factor and citescore. Pharm. Pract. (Granada) 16 (2) (2018). https://doi.org/10.18549/pharmpract.2018.02.1282

da Silva, J.A.T.: The journal impact factor (JIF): science publishing’s miscalculating metric. Acad. Quest. 30 (4), 433–441 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12129-017-9671-3

da Silva, J.A.T., Bernès, S.: Clarivate analytics: continued omnia vanitas impact factor culture. Sci. Eng. Ethics 24 (1), 291–297 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-017-9873-7

Garfield, E.: Citation indexes for science: a new dimension in documentation through association of ideas. Int. J. Epidemiol. 35 (5), 1123–1127 (2006)

Xiao, S., et al.: On modeling and predicting individual paper citation count over time. In: IJCAI, pp. 2676–2682, July 2016

Yang, J., Liu, Z.: The effect of citation behaviour on knowledge diffusion and intellectual structure. J. Informetrics 16 (1), 101225 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2021.101225

Priem, J., Hemminger, B.H.: Scientometrics 2.0: new metrics of scholarly impact on the social web. First Monday 15 (7), 16 (2010). https://doi.org/10.5210/fm.v15i7.2874

Plum analytics. About PlumX metrics. https://plumanalytics.com/learn/about-metrics/ . Accessed 11 Oct 2021

Heaton, J.P.: The vital role of creativity in academic departments. BJU Int. (Papier) 96 (3), 254–256 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1464-410X.2005.05613.x

Zhuoran, L., Yuqi, W., Wei, Q.J.L.: Research review on innovation evaluation of academic papers. J. China Soc. Sci. Tech. Inf. 40 (7), 780–790 (2021). https://doi.org/10.3772/j.issn.1000-0135.2021.07.010

Wang, X., Yang, X., Du, J., Wang, X., Li, J., Tang, X.: A deep learning approach for identifying biomedical breakthrough discoveries using context analysis. Scientometrics 1–19 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-021-04003-z

Zhang, M., Fan, B., Zhang, N., Wang, W., Fan, W.: Mining product innovation ideas from online reviews. Inf. Process. Manag. 58 (1), 102389 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ipm.2020.102389

Bornmann, L.: Usefulness of altmetrics for measuring the broader impact of research: a case study using datafrom PLOS and F1000Prime. Aslib J. Inf. Manag. 67 (3), 305–319 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1108/AJIM-09-2014-0115

Li, G.: The advantage of backwardness’s revolution and enlightenment. Contemp. Econ. Res. 4 , 57–60 (2009)

Cole, J., Suman, M., Schramm, P., Zhou, L., Reyes-Sepulveda, E., Lebo, H.: The World Internet Project. World Internet Project, University of Southern California (2012)

Digital Future. World Internet Project Report: Ninth Edition (2018). https://www.digitalcenter.org/world-internet-project/ . Accessed 30 July 2021

Liu, Y.D.: An open evaluation in academia promotes the scholarly creativity. J. Beijing Normal Univ. (Soc. Sci.) (2018)

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

School of Information Management, Nanjing Agricultural University, Nanjing, 210095, Jiangsu, China

Yue Liu, Dejun Zheng & Shaoxiong Fu

Chengdu Library of the Chinese Academy of Sciences, Chengdu, 610041, Sichuan, China

Haichen Zhou

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Dejun Zheng .

Editor information

Editors and affiliations.

Staffordshire University, Stoke-on-Trent, UK

University of Kaohsiung, Kaohsiung, Taiwan

I-Hsien Ting

FernUniversität in Hagen, Hagen, Germany

Birgit Feldmann

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2022 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this paper

Cite this paper.

Liu, Y., Zheng, D., Zhou, H., Fu, S. (2022). Value of the Influence of Research Highlights on Academic Papers. In: Uden, L., Ting, IH., Feldmann, B. (eds) Knowledge Management in Organisations. KMO 2022. Communications in Computer and Information Science, vol 1593. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-07920-7_5

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-07920-7_5

Published : 04 July 2022

Publisher Name : Springer, Cham

Print ISBN : 978-3-031-07919-1

Online ISBN : 978-3-031-07920-7

eBook Packages : Computer Science Computer Science (R0)

Share this paper

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Publish with us

Policies and ethics

• Find a journal
• Track your research

• Search Search
• CN (Chinese)
• DE (German)
• ES (Spanish)
• FR (Français)
• JP (Japanese)
• Open Research
• Booksellers
• Peer Reviewers
• Springer Nature Group ↗

2023 Springer Nature Research Highlights

The scientific community has much to be proud of, making countless inspirational breakthroughs, advancing knowledge, and impacting upon global issues the world over, giving us groundbreaking research in clinical medicine and immunology, climate change, politics, and technological innovation. 

At Springer Nature, we believe these pioneering breakthroughs, and the researchers responsible, should be celebrated and revered. Therefore, within this collection, you can take a look back and reflect on a selection of impactful work from over 70 disciplines, all dedicated to celebrating the work published by our researchers. 

Read and explore your interests from 70 subject areas

Medicine and public health.

Anesthesiology, Critical Care and Emergency Medicine

Cardiology and Angiology

Dermatology and Allergology

Geriatrics, General Practice & Family Medicine

Internal Medicine

Neurology and Psychiatry

Nursing, Pain Medicine & Rehabilitation

Oncology and Hematology

Ophthalmology and Otorhinolaryngology

Orthopedics and Surgical Orthopedics

Radiology/Imaging & Nuclear Medicine

Urology, Gynecology and Reproductive Medicine

Public Health

Biomedical Sciences

Cancer Research

Neuroscience

Pharmaceutical Sciences, Pharmacology and Toxicology

Life Sciences

Agriculture and Agronomy

Animal and Veterinary Sciences

Cell Biology

Evolutionary Biology

Food Science and Nutrition

Forestry Sciences

Marine and Freshwater Biology

Microbiology

Plant Biology

Engineering, Physics, Astronomy, Chemistry, Materials Science

Engineering

Materials Science

Mathematics and Computer Science

Computer Science

Mathematics

Geography, Earth and Environmental Sciences

Earth Sciences

Environmental Sciences

Human Geography and Environment Studies

Urban Studies

Social Sciences

Social Work and Social Policy

Criminology

Gender Studies

Population Studies

Anthropology and Archaeology

Science and Technology Studies

Business and Economics

Business & Management

International Relations and Development Studies

Operations Research

Politics and Public Policy

Art and Cultural Studies

Film and Media Studies

Music and Cultural Studies

Theatre and Performance

Humanities and History

Religious Studies

Literature, Language and Linguistics, Education

Language & Linguistics

Search and browse by imprint

Dedicated to open research, BMC now publishes over 290 quality peer-reviewed journals in Biology, Clinical Medicine and Health.

A portfolio of best in kind journals; including  Nature , the Nature-branded research and review journals, and multidisciplinary open access journals  Nature Communications  and  Scientific Reports . 

Research within 60 journals across the humanities and social sciences, underpinned by close collaboration with many societies and institutions.

With over 2900 journals, Springer is a leading STM, humanities and social sciences publisher, providing researchers in academia, scientific institutions and corporate R&D departments with quality content.

Stay up to date

Here to foster information exchange with the library community

Connect with us on LinkedIn and stay up to date with news and development.

• Tools & Services
• Account Development
• Sales and account contacts
• Professional
• Press office
• Locations & Contact

We are a world leading research, educational and professional publisher. Visit our main website for more information.

• © 2024 Springer Nature
• General terms and conditions
• Your US State Privacy Rights
• Your Privacy Choices / Manage Cookies
• Accessibility
• Legal notice
• Help us to improve this site, send feedback.

• U.S. Department of Health & Human Services

• Virtual Tour
• Staff Directory
• En Español

You are here

Nih research matters.

December 22, 2020

2020 Research Highlights — Basic Research Insights

Noteworthy advances in fundamental research.

With NIH support, scientists across the United States and around the world conduct wide-ranging research to discover ways to enhance health, lengthen life, and reduce illness and disability. Groundbreaking NIH-funded research often receives top scientific honors. In 2020, these honors included one of NIH’s own scientists and another NIH-supported scientist who received Nobel Prizes . Here’s just a small sample of the NIH-supported research accomplishments in 2020.

Full 2020 NIH Research Highlights List

20200324-covit-19.jpg

Understanding SARS-CoV-2

The first reports of an unknown, sometimes fatal respiratory infection emerged from Wuhan, China in late 2019. NIH researchers quickly moved to understand the source of that infection, a novel coronavirus called SARS-CoV-2. By February, they produced a detailed picture of the virus spike protein , which allows the virus to infect human cells. This helped to identify targets for potential vaccines and treatments. Further work gave detail into how the virus enters and exits cells, which may help guide new approaches to combatting infections and stopping transmission. A genomic analysis helped explain why SARS-CoV-2 is more deadly than many other coronaviruses. Immune system studies showed how existing immune cells may help account for the wide range of symptoms among the infected and shed light on the antibody levels and immune cells needed to protect against SARS-CoV-2 .

20200721-exercise.jpg

Exercise-induced protein may reverse age-related cognitive decline

Physical activity can play an important role in maintaining cognitive health, but it hasn’t been clear why. Researchers identified an exercise-induced protein that generated new brain cells and improved memory in mice. The protein was also found in higher levels in the blood and plasma of older adults who were active. The findings suggest new approaches to combat age-related cognitive decline.

20200601-neural-projections.jpg

Scientists find new pain-suppression center in the brain

More than 50 million Americans suffer from chronic pain, and many are prescribed opioid medications as treatment. Researchers are searching for more effective treatments for chronic pain. A study identified a group of neurons in mice that blunt pain by dampening the activity of multiple pain-processing regions of the brain. The neurons could be promising targets for new non-addictive therapies for chronic pain.

20200929-feet.jpg

Poor immune response impairs diabetic wound healing

Diabetes can impair the skin’s ability to heal itself. Even small cuts on the feet can develop into diabetic foot ulcers—chronic, non-healing wounds that are vulnerable to infection. These ulcers are a major cause of lower limb amputations, disability, and death in people with diabetes. Researchers found that diabetic foot ulcers don’t recruit the immune cells needed for normal wound healing. Understanding this impaired immune response could lead to better therapies.

20200204-hair.jpg

How stress causes gray hair

A study confirmed that stress can turn hair prematurely gray—and discovered how. Scientists found that stress affects the stem cells responsible for regenerating hair pigment. Chemicals involved in the body’s fight-or-flight response cause permanent loss of these stem cells so that new hair appears gray or white. The findings give insights for future research into how stress affects stem cells and tissue regeneration.

20200512-govd.jpg

How the nose decodes complex odors

The nose contains millions of specialized neurons that allow it to smell different odors. Simple odors activate a particular combination of neurons that send a coded message to the brain. Researchers used an advanced 3D imaging technique in mice to reveal how receptors in the nose help decode the smell of complex odor mixtures. The findings shed light on how the brain perceives odors and may help reveal why some diseases cause a loss of smell.

20200616-hair-less-yellow.jpg

Hairy human skin generated from stem cells

Scientists have been able to grow human skin outside the body for over 40 years. However, skin grown in cultures lacked the embedded structures, like hair follicles and sweat glands, found in real skin. Researchers were able to create hair-growing skin from human stem cells and graft it to mice. The lab-grown skin could aid in the study of skin diseases and skin reconstruction after burns and wounds.

20200609-cochlea.jpg

Researchers create developmental map of mouse cochlea

Hearing involves thousands of tiny hair cells inside the cochlea, a snail-shaped organ in the inner ear. In humans, hair cells can’t regenerate when they’re damaged. Loud sounds, disease, injury, and aging can all damage hair cells and result in permanent hearing loss. Scientists mapped how these sensory cells develop in the mouse cochlea. Understanding cochlear development could help researchers working on therapies for several forms of hearing loss.

Connect with Us

• More Social Media from NIH

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

• View all journals
• Explore content
• About the journal
• Publish with us
• Sign up for alerts

Research Highlights

Selections from the scientific literature by Nature's news team

A gel taken orally dampens the effects of alcohol intoxication, according to animal experiments. Credit: Getty

Nanoscience and technology

17 May 2024

How cheesemaking could cook up an antidote for alcohol excess

Analysis of more than 40,000 university application essays found that gradual transitions between chunks of text correlated with higher marks. Credit: Dusan Stankovic/Getty

Reading between the lines: application essays predict university success

The blood–brain barrier is comprised of cells lining the blood vessels (artificially coloured) that supply the brain. Credit: Samunella/SPL

15 May 2024

Organoids merge to model the blood–brain barrier

Hills blaze in Cameroon. Fires are becoming increasingly frequent in moist tropical forests of West and Central Africa. Credit: Jan Mastnik/Shutterstock

Climate sciences

14 May 2024

Africa’s lush tropical forests face a surprising threat: fire

Bonded pairs of green-rumped parrotlets can resort to killing rivals’ chicks. Credit: Alamy

Animal behaviour

10 May 2024

These parrots go on killing sprees over real-estate shortages

The light-absorbing rods and cones in the retina (artificially coloured) deteriorate in people with Leber’s congenital amaurosis. Credit: Science Photo Library

Gene therapy

09 May 2024

CRISPR therapy restores some vision to people with blindness

Scientists have identified three genes that helped the modern cauliflower to evolve from its broccoli progenitors. Credit: Getty

08 May 2024

How the cauliflower got its curlicues

Electric-vehicle batteries can still be useful, even after retirement. Credit: STR/AFP/Getty

Renewable energy

07 May 2024

Old electric-vehicle batteries can find new purpose — on the grid

An exoplanet (artist’s illustration) that’s home to living organisms might not look green. Credit: Mark Garlick/SPL

02 May 2024

Never mind little green men: life on other planets might be purple

A droplet of a magnetic fluid responds to a rotating external magnetic field. Credit: X. Zhao et al./Nat. Mater.

Materials science

01 May 2024

A magnetic liquid makes for an injectable sensor in living tissue

Smaller declines in well-being during the COVID-19 pandemic were reported by people who were already socially isolated before lockdowns started. Credit: Getty

Human behaviour

Pandemic lockdowns were less of a shock for people with fewer ties

There are fewer than 100 known specimens of the critically endangered tea-tree fingers fungus, which grows at six sites in Australia. Credit: Alamy

Conservation biology

30 April 2024

Not just truffles: dogs can sniff out surpassingly rare native fungus

The fruiting body of Aspergillus niger (artificially coloured), a fungus that can mop up contaminants in tainted soil. Credit: Eye Of Science/SPL

25 April 2024

Garden-variety fungus is an expert at environmental clean-ups

An inventory lists the aviation emissions of all 197 nations that are signatories to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change. Credit: Getty

Climate change

Air-travel climate-change emissions detailed for nearly 200 nations

The now-extinct salmon species Oncorhynchus rastrosus had ‘tusks’ protruding from its snout (right top and bottom, artist’s illustration; top left, scan of skull with illustration of the originally proposed position of the teeth; bottom left, skull). Credit: K. M. Claeson et al./PLoS One (CC-BY 4.0)

Palaeontology

24 April 2024

This giant extinct salmon had tusks like a warthog

Among the genes that cause post-traumatic stress disorder are some that affect brain neurons (pictured, artificially coloured). Credit: Thomas Deerinck, NCMIR/SPL

22 April 2024

Dozens of genes are linked to post-traumatic stress disorder

Data collected by the IceCube Neutrino Observatory in Antarctica has yielded the first verified detection of tau neutrinos. Credit: Jeff Warneck/Alamy

Particle physics

19 April 2024

Detectors deep in South Pole ice pin down elusive tau neutrino

A stone pendant was among the thousands of beads and other ornaments found in a Maya pyramid. Credit: C. Halperin

Archaeology

18 April 2024

Burnt remains of Maya royalty mark a dramatic power shift

Electrostatic charge harvested from the skin of the person holding a newly devised water bottle is used to disinfect the bottle’s contents. Credit: Young-Jun Kim

17 April 2024

This water bottle purifies your drink with energy from your steps

Humpback whales fill their ribbed oral pouches with water to feed — and sometimes, scientists report, to rub off parasites. Credit: Doug Perrine/Alamy

15 April 2024

A spa session for humpback whales

Quick links

• Explore articles by subject
• Guide to authors
• Editorial policies

Research Highlights

by Bastis Consultores | Apr 30, 2021 | Thesis Development | 0 comments

The research highlights concisely summarize the main results and provide readers with an overview of the thesis or article. They include three to five vignettes that describe the spirit of the research (e.g., results or conclusions) and highlight what is unique in the study (Ciambella, 2008),

Understand the meaning of highlights

Things are changing in the world of research and there is a movement towards the relevance of having more “readings” of your article or thesis, rather than publishing in high impact factor journals.

If you understand what the featured ones can represent to lead people to read your article or thesis, you will realize how important it is to know its meaning.

These convey the main findings and give readers a quick overview of the article’s text. Highlights describe the essence of the research (e.g., results and conclusions) and highlight what sets it apart.

Main results.

Quick summary.

The essence of research.

These are the key words to understand the meaning of the highlights. The challenge is how to express them in shorter sentences than a tweet.

Clear view of the nature of your research

When the details of our research work are challenging, we tend to focus our writing on describing them. Details are important, especially if they are challenging, because someone else might want to reproduce your experience and needs those details. But the details of your thought process or your experiments are not the nature of your research. Therefore, they should not stand out.

The nature of your research is your WHY.

What is the ultimate question your research is trying to answer?

Why are you researching a certain topic in the first place?

What drives your research?

Some topics are easier than others, but having a clear view of why your research is essential to writing meaningful summaries.

Realize that people know little about your topic

I remember speaking to a small audience and feeling like I don’t make myself understood. This is a common flaw. Even if you have one, two or more experts in your field in front of you, when presenting an article at a conference, you should always assume that there is someone in the audience who is not an expert in your field. And when you prepare your presentation, you’ll be talking to this person, not the experts.

The most prominent audience is the world. Therefore, you are 100% sure that people who know little about your subject will read your highlights. You must write to them.

This is a big challenge because, ideally, you should be able to express the complexity of your topic in simple, clear and concise words. One way to test these highlights is to ask for the opinion of a friend from another field.

Evidence your contribution in the field

Researchers often waste their highlights with things that do not contribute to the nature of their research or evidence its contribution. Here are several examples.

If we write: “A hollow cone spray is used in an impact process that occurs on a flat surface” Why is this a highlight? In all research on impact aerosols, is it not logical that this impact should occur on a surface? Why is this a highlight? The surface may be flat, curved, dry, wet, structured or not, but this sentence does not explain the nature of the research, nor does it express any contribution in the field.

If we wanted to change this sentence to something more meaningful, it could be; “Hollow cone aerosols in cooling processes address heterogeneities in the temperature field.”

The sentence is not perfect, but it has 85 characters (after 2 iterations) and contains the nature of the research. Introduces the type of aerosols; if they are used in cooling processes, it means that their impact on a surface is logical; and sets out the purpose of that impact, which is to cool the surface and address heterogeneities in temperature fields, thus signaling the challenge.

Another example where a small change can make a difference.

“The effect of drop dynamics, surface temperature, and spray height on the liquid film formed after spray impact.”

Firstly, it is too long, so it needs to be shortened. But it contains what is included in the scope of the article, when the journal requires the main findings. Suppose the authors find that these three parameters produce an effect on the result, a small change can solve the question,

“Droplet dynamics, surface temperature, and spray height affect the formation of the liquid film.”

While the highlighting of the first example contextualizes the reader, spray cooling involves the formation of liquid films. And through this highlighting, the reader knows which parameters affect the result and, if interested, will read the article to know how.

Be clear, concise and get straight to the point

A not inconsiderable number of works I’ve reviewed doesn’t pay much attention to the 85-character limitation. It obliges us to seek clarity in our statements. You have to be concise in the words used to convey the meaning. And get straight to the point because that’s what the standouts are for, right? It leads the potential reader to make a quick assessment on whether to read the article or not.

A good exercise is to distance yourself from your article. Put yourself in the place of the reader and be critical.

Use simple terms

Schonlau et al (2004) point out, this is probably the biggest challenge. But it’s important to understand what we mean by simple terms. Some research topics include words that are not simple because they are part of the lexicon used in the field. Simple terms arise naturally when we have a mature and clear view of our major advances.

The advances help refine the message of the research, highlighting only what really matters. And when we express what matters in simple terms, the reader should experience clarity and the desire to know more.

These reflections are not exhaustive and I hope these “guidelines” motivate you to be more careful when writing meaningful summaries.

How to do it?

Powell and Lynn (2004), point out the following aspects:

Include the most important part of your research in your highlights.

The highlight is the first thing anyone online will read. Use the highlights to tell that potential reader what’s best about your article and why they want to read it.

Conversely, good highlights also prevent a potential reader from wasted time. If your article doesn’t cover the information they need to know or are interested in, the highlights let them know immediately so they don’t have to read half the article before discovering it.

Use the active voice to make your writing concise.

Take the important ideas from your research work and reformulate them so that the sentences are in subject-verb-object order. Use active verbs, such as “show” and “affect,” to describe what your study has discovered.

For example, write “UV rays affect overall skin health” instead of “Overall skin health is affected by sun exposure.”

Research papers often use the passive voice, which is more verbose and difficult to understand. Since featured articles have a strict length requirement, using active voice allows you to stay within the character limit while including the most important information in your article. For example, you may write, “Prolonged exposure to light damages skin cells.”

Review for a general audience and not for your peers.

When you write the highlights, your audience is the world at large, not other researchers in your field. Remove jargon, acronyms, and other art terms from your summaries. They should explain their work the way they would explain it to a child.

Use the simplest words possible, even if they are not technically accurate. For example, instead of referring to “squamous cells,” you could say “skin cells” or simply “skin.” Your work will enter the specific cells studied.

Carefully correct the highlights.

Because the highlights are so brief, a typo will stand out like a sore thumb. Errata in featured texts can also cause it to not appear in as many search results as it should, nullifying the purpose of featured texts.

One method of correction is to read the featured texts backwards, word for word. This encourages you to focus on each of the words rather than the sentence as a whole.

It’s also a good idea to let someone else read your featured texts. Someone unfamiliar with your highlights or your work might notice mistakes that you’ve repeatedly overlooked because you know what you meant.

What should and should not be included in the research highlights?

The following are the points that should and should not be written in the summaries:

Include 3 to 5 highlights.

A maximum of 85 characters in each highlight, including spaces.

Only the main results of the work should be included.

Write down the highlights of the research in the present tense.

Be concise and specific.

Provide an overview of the study.

Describe the distinctive results and conclusion of the work.

Cover only the essential results.

What not to do

Do not provide unnecessary information on research highlights.

It should not be too long.

Don’t describe all of your findings in the highlights.

Example of research highlights

Applied Catalysis A: General

Volumes 411-412, January 16, 2012, pages 7-14

Highly oriented ZnO nanowires were cultured on the c-axis on glass using aqueous solutions.

The growth temperature does not exceed 95 °C at any step of the synthesis.

The photocatalytic and wetting properties after UV irradiation have been studied.

ZnO nanowires show superior photocatalytic activity.

Our specialists wait for you to contact them through the quote form or direct chat. We also have confidential communication channels such as WhatsApp and Messenger. And if you want to be aware of our innovative services and the different advantages of hiring us, follow us on Facebook, Instagram or Twitter.

If this article was to your liking, do not forget to share it on your social networks.

Bibliographic References

Schonlau, Matthias, Ronald D. Fricker, Jr., and Marc N. Elliott. 2002. Conducting research surveys via e-mail and the web. Santa Monica, CA: Rand. 118 pp.

Ciambella, C. 2008. Review of Research Methods in Information. Legal Information Alert 27.1 (Jan.): 11-12.

Powell, Ronald R., and Lynn Silipigni Connaway. 2004. Basic research methods for librarians. 4th ed. Westport, CT: Libraries Unlimited. 360 p.

You may also be interested in: APA Standards 7th Edition

Research Highlights. Photo: Unsplash. Credits: Jeswin Thomas

Submit a Comment Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

Categories:

The most seen.

Copy short link